Friday, 13 September 2019

Mini-Summit of West African Military Rulers in Lome, Togo (1969): My Father A Witness to History

Lt. Cmdr E.O.A. Makinde descending from a plane at Lome Airport, 1969

Photo capture of my Father, Lieutenant Commander Emmanuel Makinde alighting from a jet at Lome Airport behind Rear Admiral Joseph Wey, the Chief of Naval Staff of the Nigerian Navy, on Saturday, November 8th 1969.

Rear Admiral Wey is saluting General Gnassingbe Eyadema of Togo who was hosting a summit with Nigeria’s Head of State, Major General Yakubu Gowon (second from left in the foreground) and the later to arrive Ghanaian Head of State, Brigadier Akwasi Afrifa.

© Adeyinka Makinde (2019)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.


Friday, 6 September 2019

The Great Riot of Istanbul: A Gladio Operation

Ian Fleming’s article in the Sunday Times edition of September 11th 1955

The Istanbul Riot of September 6th to 7th 1955 is not only important because it represented the final phase of the transition of Constantinople from what was historically a Christian city, it also provides an example of how the state is capable of covertly engineering acts of terrorism for the purposes of the psychological manipulation of its citizens in order to meet political objectives.

The pogrom was the result of a conspiracy which was hatched at the highest levels of the Turkish government headed by Adnan Menderes. Specifically, the plans were drawn up in the boardroom of the Seferberlik Taktik Kurulu (Tactical Mobilisation Group/TMG) of the Turkish Army High Command. This was the Turkish version of the Gladio franchise of ultra-secret stay-behind units and special operations bodies that were linked to NATO. Sabri Yirmibesoglu, a retired general, confirmed his involvement in the riots while a serving member of the TMG to the Turkish press in the 2000s.

Three hundred miles away in the Greek city of Thessaloniki, a Turkish agent placed a bomb in a building which housed the Turkish consulate, and which was also close to the to a museum dedicated to the founder of the Turkish state, Kemal Attaturk. The resultant damage was then blamed on Greek provocateurs. The ensuing pogrom in Istanbul targeted the sizeable Greek population and other Christian communities including Georgians and Armenians; consuming both human life and property.

Ian Fleming’s “The Great Riot of Istanbul”, published in the Sunday Times of September 11th, 1955 gave an eye-witness account.

Menderes, who was later overthrown by the Turkish military, was put on trial for a number of crimes including the planning of the pogrom, was found guilty and executed.

However, the objective of driving out a sizeable amount of Istanbul’s Christian population succeeded as many would emigrate over the coming decades.

© Adeyinka Makinde (2019)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.


When Joe Garba Met Henry Kissinger

Colonel Joseph Garba and Dr. Henry Kissinger 

Washington D.C. in late January of 1976.

The Nigerian Commissioner for External Affairs, Colonel Joseph Garba, meets his American counterpart Secretary of State Dr. Henry Kissinger for the first time.

Garba: You have a good man in Lagos.
Kissinger: Good for whom, you or us?

PHOTO: From Joseph Garba’s memoir Diplomatic Soldiering. Published by Spectrum Books in association with Safari Books, Channel Islands, U.K.), 1987 238pp.

NB

General Murtala Muhammed, Nigeria’s then Head of State, took a mischievous delight in seeing the tall Garba shaking hands with the shorter Kissinger on the grounds that it showed someone “looking down” on the imperious U.S. Secretary of State.

© Adeyinka Makinde (2019)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.

Thursday, 5 September 2019

Excerpt from Lt. General Olusegun Obasanjo's Keynote Speech at the World Conference for Action Against Apartheid on Monday, August 22nd 1977

Lt. General Olusegun Obasanjo, head of the Federal Military Government of Nigeria (1976-1979)

“It will no longer help for our so-called friends to adopt pious postures and preach non-violence when our enemies are busy inflicting mental and physical violence on us. We shall no longer watch the racists of Pretoria devise improvements to their machinery of terror and repression. We should no longer be just outraged, we must act.

In the words of of my worthy predecessor (*), we cannot pretend that we are unaware of the machinations and conspiracy against our continent by not just the racists of South Africa, but even by those who pretend to be friends of this continent, but whose sole purpose is in what they can get out of us.

The black people of the world are drawing nearer the stage of direct involvement in the struggle against against Apartheid in South Africa. We as a nation will acquit ourselves creditably, when that stage is reached.

We wish to salute the courage of our brothers and sisters who are in the frontline of the struggle in southern Africa. We wish to recall and pay due homage to the hopes of Soweto and others involved in the June 16, 1976 challenge to Apartheid. We are aware of their continuing struggle and sacrifice and the heroic stand of the youths and students of South Africa.

We take cognisance of their potential. The undaunted youth of Soweto are the new additional weapons which the system of Apartheid has designed, In time, this new weapon will be harnessed with others to destroy Apartheid.”

- His Excellency Lt. General Olusegun Obasanjo speaking at the opening of the World Conference for Action Against Apartheid on Monday, August 22nd 1977.

(*) Referring to the late General Murtala Muhammed, who was assassinated in February 1976 during an abortive coup.

© Adeyinka Makinde (2019)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.

Tuesday, 3 September 2019

Murtala Muhammed and Olusegun Obasanjo: Implacable Foes of Southern African Aparthied and Colonialism

Brigadiers Murtala Muhammed (foreground) and Olusegun Obasanjo (background right) photographed soon after the coup which overthrew General Yakubu Gowon in late July of 1975. (Getty Images)

The military government headed by Murtala Muhammed (1938-1976) and Olusegun Obasanjo (b. 1937) from July 1975 to October 1979 was one that was marked by its implacable opposition to Apartheid and colonialism in southern Africa. The hardline stance it took was predicted by U.S. embassy dispatches which considered both men to be fundamentally anti-West in attitude. Prior to coming to power, Obasanjo had, with the backing of troops, sought to evict US embassy agencies from annex premises by staging a 24-hour occupation. It was a portent of the radical attitude both men would take when they held the reins of power.

Brigadier Murtala Muhammed, an army signals officer, and Brigadier Olusegun Obasanjo, an army engineer were on the radar of the American embassy in Lagos, Nigeria long before they seized power in a military coup. And as a result of the observations and analysis provided by the ambassador and other staff, the United States came to consider each to be dangerous firebrands when it came to their dealings with the West and their attitude to the Apartheid regime of South Africa.

Appraisals of the character of both men are contained in declassified State Department cables dispatched from the US embassy before and after the coup which overthrew General Yakubu Gowon on July 29th 1975. One accurately described Muhammed as an “impetuous, ruthless man”, while another considered Obasanjo to be -again correctly- a “strong-willed egocentric” young man. And with their coming to power in the aftermath of the anti-Gowon putsch, it was correctly predicted that a Muhammed and Obasanjo-led junta (including M.D. Yusuf, the Inspector-General of Police) would formulate an even harder line policy in relation to southern Africa, which would lead to friction with the United States government, which at the time was pro-dialogue and anti-sanctions. Both men were seen as being particularly sensitive to issues which raised the question of anti-black racism and the liberation struggles in southern Africa which centred on Angola, Mozambique, Rhodesia-Zimbabwe and South Africa.

A communication titled “Nigeria’s New Leaders: A Preliminary Estimate” which was dispatched to Washington on Wednesday, July 30th 1975, noted that three years earlier at a conference on foreign policy, both Muhammed and Obasanjo had entered into what they felt was an “extraordinary” exchange on southern Africa, with the impulsive Muhammed insisting that Nigeria should send combatant troops “to South Africa”, and Obasanjo retorting to his hot-headed colleague: “O.K. you can go to South Africa, but I’m staying here.”

Despite his caution on that issue, Obasanjo was also, nonetheless, seen to be hardline. A cable dated July 14th 1975 which ruminated on US-Nigerian relationships in the wake of Obasanjo’s invasion of Embassy property, noted the following:

Notwithstanding his usual reputation as jovial and openly pro-American, Obasanjo has in the past expressed strong feelings on American policies in Africa. He is reportedly deeply committed to the African liberation struggle; he has discounted the prospects of cooperation with the “white-controlled” world and prior to April 1974 had accused NATO of encouraging, arming and financing Portugal to carry suppression and genocide. He is said to believe that in a showdown, the US and NATO would be allies of South Africa and Rhodesia.

The forecast of hardline policies would be borne out.

At an appearance at a special Organisation of African Unity (OAU) summit in January 1976 during which the majority of member nations formally recognised the MPLA (Movimento Popular de Libertacao de Angola) as the legitimate representative of Angolan self-determination, Muhammed’s “Africa Has Come of Age” speech captured attention. The speech itself was a rebuttal of the sentiments expressed to Muhammed by US President Gerald Ford in a letter the Federal Military Government made public in January 1976. Muhammed was offended by what he perceived as the lecturing tone of Ford about the decision of Muhammed’s government to give official recognition to the MPLA. Muhammed considered Ford’s objection to the Soviet and Cuban-backed organisation as evidence of Washington’s implicit support for Apartheid South Africa and lack of commitment to Black African self-determination.

The concluding portion of his speech went:

Mr. Chairman, when I contemplate the evils of apartheid, my heart bleeds and I am sure the heart of every true-blooded African bleeds … Rather than join hands with the forces fighting for self-determination and against racism and apartheid, the United States policy-makers clearly decided that it was in the best interests of their country to maintain white supremacy and minority regimes in Africa.

Africa has come of age. It is no longer under the orbit of any extra-continental power. It should no longer take orders from any country, however powerful. The fortunes of Africa are in our hands to make or mar. For too long we have been kicked around. For too long we have been treated like adolescents who cannot discern their interests and act accordingly. For too long it has been presumed that the African needs outside ‘experts’ to tell him who are his friends and who are his enemies.

The time has come when we should make it clear that we can decide for ourselves; that we know our interests; that we are capable of resolving African problems without presumptuous lessons in ideological dangers which more often than not, have no relevance for us; not for the problem at hand.

Muhammed was assassinated one month later in an abortive coup. But as Head of State, Obasanjo stepped up financial aid and logistical support for the liberation movements in southern Africa, as well as giving moral support to the so-called Frontline States. He hosted Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere on a state visit in 1976 and visited Kenneth Kaunda and Samora Machel respectively of Zambia and Mozambique in 1977. His government hosted a major anti-Apartheid conference in Lagos in August 1977 (the World Conference for Action against Apartheid), and in the previous year, his government withdrew the Nigerian contingent to the Montreal Olympics; a measure taken in relation to the 1978 Commonwealth Games in New Zealand. Both actions in relation to sporting events were predicated on the disapproval of continuing sporting links by Western nations with South Africa. In 1979, the Obasanjo government also took the draconian measure of nationalising British Petroleum (BP) in Nigeria because it alleged that the British government had allowed BP to sell crude oil to South Africa.

These actions justified the assessment given by the American embassy about his debate with Muhammed several years before they came to power, that it “revealed an intense, emotional commitment to more militant measures in southern Africa.”

Obasanjo’s words were as frank and pointed as his actions. When marking the end of Nyerere’s visit in 1976, he praised Nyerere’s role in what he described as “the march towards the total liberation of Africa from foreign rule, colonial oppression, economic exploitation and the heretical bigotry of white minority supremacy on our African soil”. And in his speech at the World Conference for Action against Apartheid, he sounded the following warning:

It will no longer help for our so-called friends to adopt pious postures and preach non-violence when our enemies are inflicting mental and physical violence on us. We shall no longer watch the racists of Pretoria devise improvements to their machinery of terror and repression. We should no longer be just outraged, we must act.

That tenor of the ‘Murtala-Obasanjo’ government was consistently reflected through the role of Brigadier Joseph Garba, the soldier who served as Nigeria’s Minister for External Affairs from 1975 to 1978. Muhammed took a mischievous delight in a photograph of the tall Garba shaking hands with the diminutive Henry Kissinger, on the grounds that it showed someone “looking down” on the imperious US Secretary of State. It was through Garba that the government led by Muhammed and Obasanjo made crucial decisions in relation to southern Africa, one of the most critical having been the recognition granted to the MPLA. Many analysts have argued that while it wrecked the chances of reconciliation between the three movements contending for power, it nonetheless prevented a South African takeover of Luanda.

While both Muhammed and Obasanjo have controversial, and even highly divisive aspects to their legacies, each man’s contribution to the struggle for Black African liberation must be noted and remembered for general posterity, as well as serving as a reminder to those elites in South Africa who stir the pot of anti-Nigerian sentiment and xenophobia against African migrants residing in that country.

© Adeyinka Makinde (2019)

Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in London, England.


Wednesday, 28 August 2019

Adeyinka Makinde Interviewed on The Mind Renewed: Can the British State Convict itself? (Part Two: “Rendition” & “The Troubles”)

TMR 160: Adeyinka Makinde: Can the British State Convict itself? (Part Two: “Rendition” & “The Troubles”)

PART 2

The second part of a wide-ranging nterview with Julian Charles of The Mind Renewed about my proposed paper, “Can the British State Convict itself?” This segment looked at Britain’s role in the American-led extraordinary rendition of Islamist terror suspects involving the former foreign secretary Jack Straw and the former head of counter-intelligence at MI6, Mark Allen and Britain’s counter-insurgency strategy in Northern Ireland which was initiated in the early 1970s by the then Brigadier Frank Kitson.

Julian Charles: Hello everybody! Julian Charles here of The Mind Renewed dot Com coming to you as usual from the depths of the Lancashire countryside here in the UK, and very straightforwardly this week we’re going to be listening to the second part of my interview with the lawyer and university lecturer Adeyinka Makinde on the subject of his forthcoming academic paper, “Can the British State Convict Itself?” Now in the first part last week, we talked about then U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair’s decision to take Britain to war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 2003, and also we talk about the fact that a good deal of legal opinion considered that decision to have involved participation in a conspiracy to wage an aggressive war in contravention of established international criminal law. Well, in this second part now we go on to discuss Britain’s role in the U.S.-led so-called ‘extraordinary rendition’ of Islamist terror suspects and consider to what extent former U.K. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was involved in that, and, indeed, the former head of counter-intelligence at MI6 Mark Allen. And we end with a look at Britain’s counter-insurgency strategy in Northern Ireland which was initiated in the early 1970s by then Brigadier Frank Kitson. Of course, if you haven’t heard the first part, I do highly recommend that you go back and listen to that before listening to this part, not only because that discussion about the Iraq War and Tony Blair was very interesting in its own right, but because Adeyinka gives some very important background to all this about international and U.K. domestic law, which I think helps to frame the whole discussion, so please do go back and listen to that first part if you haven’t read it already. So as I say, in this part we move on to questions surrounding rendition and also the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland and continue to ask that question, can the British state convict itself? O.K, so I’d like briefly to look at the other couple of examples. We took a long time –I thought this was going to be a very interesting in-depth conversation- I hope you don’t mind.

Adeyinka Makinde: Oh no, don’t worry.



Adeyinka Makinde Interviewed on The Mind Renewed: Can the British State Convict Itself? (Part One: Tony Blair & Iraq)

TMR 159: Adeyinka Makinde: Can the British State Convict Itself? (Part One: Tony Blair & Iraq)

PART 1

The first part of a wide-ranging interview with Julian Charles of The Mind Renewed about my proposed paper, “Can the British State Convict Itself?”  This segment focused on Prime Minister Tony Blair’s decision to take Britain to war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 2003, the circumstances of which much considered legal opinion has equated to have involved participating in a conspiracy to wage an aggressive war in contravention of established international criminal law.

Julian Charles: Hello everybody! Julian Charles here of The Mind Renewed dot Com coming to you after a break of several weeks of ‘maternity leave’ as I’ve been calling it after the arrival of our new baby- coming to you from the depths of the Lancashire countryside here in the UK, and today I’m very pleased to welcome to the programme the lawyer and university lecturer Adeyinka Makinde for a discussion on his soon to be published article with the intriguing title “Intelligence Accountability: Can the British State Convict Itself?” Adeyinka trained for the law as a barrister; he lectures in criminal law and public law at a university in London, here in the UK and has an academic research interest in intelligence and security matters. He writes on international relations, politics and military history, and has been a programme consultant and expert commentator for the BBC World Service Radio, China Radio International and the Voice of Russia. Adeyinka, thank you very much indeed for joining us on the programme.

Adeyinka Makinde: My pleasure Julian.